| Title |
Effects of sequential nutritional support on nutritional status and expression of regulatory T lymphocyte in patients with early severe traumatic brain injury
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ndt.s149802 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kai Jia, Xin Tong, Fang Liang |
| Abstract |
To investigate the effects of sequential nutritional support on nutritional status and immune regulation in patients with early severe traumatic brain injury (STBI). A total of 62 patients diagnosed with STBI enrolled from Chaoyang Hospital (Beijing, China) from February 2015 to October 2016 were divided into two groups. The observational group (n=34) was given sequential nutritional support and the control group (n=28) was given the standard formula of whole protein enteral preparations. The energy supply for the two groups was 30 kcal/kg/d and protein 1.6 g/kg/d, respectively. The albumin (ALB), total protein (TP), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (Hs-CRP), neuron-specific enolase (NSE), Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), and regulatory T cells before and after nutritional treatment were measured in both groups. At the 14th day, the levels of ALB (41.7±4.2 g/L) and TP (70.6±4.9 g/L) were significantly higher than those in the control group (33.5±2.3 g/L and 62.3±3.9 g/L) (P<0.05). The levels of Hs-CRP and NSE were significantly lower in the observational group (0.96±0.82 mg/L and 11.96±7.82 ng/L) than in the control group (1.17±0.74 mg/L and 19.17±6.74 ng/L) (P<0.05). The GCS score in the observational group (11.5±2.9) was significantly higher than that in the control group (8.1±1.7) (P<0.05). The percentage of Tregs in the peripheral CD4+ lymphocytes was significantly lower in the observational group than in the control group (P<0.05). The effect of sequential nutritional support is better than conventional nutritional support in patients with STBI. The findings call for early identification of malnutrition and individual nutritional support. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 26% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 17% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 7 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 June 2018.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#2,192
of 3,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,834
of 342,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#50
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,131 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.